HorrorMovieFans.com

Just looked up that chick on FB. Not bad. Hubby looks douchy, though.

Foo wrote:[

That's great, but it makes no difference. I am not asking to impact a person's life in any way with my story.

so you take it on a case by case basis. is this person credible, specifically. not, are any rape accusations credible, because this one may not be?

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:[

That's great, but it makes no difference. I am not asking to impact a person's life in any way with my story.

so you take it on a case by case basis. is this person credible, specifically. not, are any rape accusations credible, because this one may not be?

I look at the totality:

- evidence
- timing
- credibility

Evidence tops all. Credibility/Timing/Motive are secondary characters. In the absence of evidence, the other things must be really strong. Like if the accuser has no motive and reports an assault immediately, that is a huge difference from someone with a motive who waits.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:[

That's great, but it makes no difference. I am not asking to impact a person's life in any way with my story.

so you take it on a case by case basis. is this person credible, specifically. not, are any rape accusations credible, because this one may not be?

I look at the totality:

- evidence
- timing
- credibility

Evidence tops all. Credibility/Timing/Motive are secondary characters. In the absence of evidence, the other things must be really strong. Like if the accuser has no motive and reports an assault immediately, that is a huge difference from someone with a motive who waits.

that is completely fair, for an investigation. but you can't always look at the totality, or don't have it available to you straight away, as someone who is being confided in.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:[

That's great, but it makes no difference. I am not asking to impact a person's life in any way with my story.

so you take it on a case by case basis. is this person credible, specifically. not, are any rape accusations credible, because this one may not be?

I look at the totality:

- evidence
- timing
- credibility

Evidence tops all. Credibility/Timing/Motive are secondary characters. In the absence of evidence, the other things must be really strong. Like if the accuser has no motive and reports an assault immediately, that is a huge difference from someone with a motive who waits.

that is completely fair, for an investigation. but you can't always look at the totality, or don't have it available to you straight away, as someone who is being confided in.

Oh sure, credibility is what makes you consider in the first place. Also, depending on the situation, you may not need evidence because it is not impacting a life.

for instance, best friend says they were raped. You don't need evidence to support and believe them. Best friend says he is going to ruin a person's life, you would want to help them determine whether the evidence warrants the allegation, though.

And I have friends from all walks. If something was a little less clear than rape, I would definitely question them differently.

Foo wrote:
Oh sure, credibility is what makes you consider in the first place. Also, depending on the situation, you may not need evidence because it is not impacting a life.

for instance, best friend says they were raped. You don't need evidence to support and believe them. Best friend says he is going to ruin a person's life, you would want to help them determine whether the evidence warrants the allegation, though.

often it's your best friend (or child or sibling whatever) telling you that "this person" raped me. and then they are treated as if they're lying, as if they made it up for attention, from the outset. even before it becomes an issue of ruining someone's life or not.

or we see it from the outside and find a detail that doesn't feel right to us, and take that to question the validity of other claims of rape. like "i think asia argento is a fucking opportunistic liar, so can i really trust anyone else who makes a claim of being raped or assaulted?"

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
Oh sure, credibility is what makes you consider in the first place. Also, depending on the situation, you may not need evidence because it is not impacting a life.

for instance, best friend says they were raped. You don't need evidence to support and believe them. Best friend says he is going to ruin a person's life, you would want to help them determine whether the evidence warrants the allegation, though.

often it's your best friend (or child or sibling whatever) telling you that "this person" raped me. and then they are treated as if they're lying, as if they made it up for attention, from the outset. even before it becomes an issue of ruining someone's life or not.

or we see it from the outside and find a detail that doesn't feel right to us, and take that to question the validity of other claims of rape. like "i think asia argento is a fucking opportunistic liar, so can i really trust anyone else who makes a claim of being raped or assaulted?"

False accusers have best friends, too.

You know what else is super unfortunate, troubled kids and people are often targeted by creeps because they feel it is safer. They are both less likely to tell and less likely to be believed.

None of it changes the facts, which is that allegations need to be proven. You can swing wildly to be a super rapee advocate because you know a victim, are a victim, or think victims get a bad shake without understanding the full (and often unintended) consequences.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
Oh sure, credibility is what makes you consider in the first place. Also, depending on the situation, you may not need evidence because it is not impacting a life.

for instance, best friend says they were raped. You don't need evidence to support and believe them. Best friend says he is going to ruin a person's life, you would want to help them determine whether the evidence warrants the allegation, though.

often it's your best friend (or child or sibling whatever) telling you that "this person" raped me. and then they are treated as if they're lying, as if they made it up for attention, from the outset. even before it becomes an issue of ruining someone's life or not.

or we see it from the outside and find a detail that doesn't feel right to us, and take that to question the validity of other claims of rape. like "i think asia argento is a fucking opportunistic liar, so can i really trust anyone else who makes a claim of being raped or assaulted?"

False accusers have best friends, too.

You know what else is super unfortunate, troubled kids and people are often targeted by creeps because they feel it is safer. They are both less likely to tell and less likely to be believed.

None of it changes the facts, which is that allegations need to be proven. You can swing wildly to be a super rapee advocate because you know a victim, are a victim, or think victims get a bad shake without understanding the full (and often unintended) consequences.

agreed. allegations need to be proven. liars need to be held accountable. and actual victims need to be made to feel safer to come forward, or to even just confide in someone. i'm not swinging wildly. i just don't want to see any swinging wildly the other way.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
Oh sure, credibility is what makes you consider in the first place. Also, depending on the situation, you may not need evidence because it is not impacting a life.

for instance, best friend says they were raped. You don't need evidence to support and believe them. Best friend says he is going to ruin a person's life, you would want to help them determine whether the evidence warrants the allegation, though.

often it's your best friend (or child or sibling whatever) telling you that "this person" raped me. and then they are treated as if they're lying, as if they made it up for attention, from the outset. even before it becomes an issue of ruining someone's life or not.

or we see it from the outside and find a detail that doesn't feel right to us, and take that to question the validity of other claims of rape. like "i think asia argento is a fucking opportunistic liar, so can i really trust anyone else who makes a claim of being raped or assaulted?"

False accusers have best friends, too.

You know what else is super unfortunate, troubled kids and people are often targeted by creeps because they feel it is safer. They are both less likely to tell and less likely to be believed.

None of it changes the facts, which is that allegations need to be proven. You can swing wildly to be a super rapee advocate because you know a victim, are a victim, or think victims get a bad shake without understanding the full (and often unintended) consequences.

agreed. allegations need to be proven. liars need to be held accountable. and actual victims need to be made to feel safer to come forward, or to even just confide in someone. i'm not swinging wildly. i just don't want to see any swinging wildly the other way.

To prevent wild swinging the other way, don't pull the pendulum back so far. A sensible, legal process by which allegations are documented and investigated, with the victim (and their supporters) understanding it may not result in the justice they desire, it might play a part in a bigger puzzle, or it might be the final piece.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
Oh sure, credibility is what makes you consider in the first place. Also, depending on the situation, you may not need evidence because it is not impacting a life.

for instance, best friend says they were raped. You don't need evidence to support and believe them. Best friend says he is going to ruin a person's life, you would want to help them determine whether the evidence warrants the allegation, though.

often it's your best friend (or child or sibling whatever) telling you that "this person" raped me. and then they are treated as if they're lying, as if they made it up for attention, from the outset. even before it becomes an issue of ruining someone's life or not.

or we see it from the outside and find a detail that doesn't feel right to us, and take that to question the validity of other claims of rape. like "i think asia argento is a fucking opportunistic liar, so can i really trust anyone else who makes a claim of being raped or assaulted?"

False accusers have best friends, too.

You know what else is super unfortunate, troubled kids and people are often targeted by creeps because they feel it is safer. They are both less likely to tell and less likely to be believed.

None of it changes the facts, which is that allegations need to be proven. You can swing wildly to be a super rapee advocate because you know a victim, are a victim, or think victims get a bad shake without understanding the full (and often unintended) consequences.

agreed. allegations need to be proven. liars need to be held accountable. and actual victims need to be made to feel safer to come forward, or to even just confide in someone. i'm not swinging wildly. i just don't want to see any swinging wildly the other way.

To prevent wild swinging the other way, don't pull the pendulum back so far. A sensible, legal process by which allegations are documented and investigated, with the victim (and their supporters) understanding it may not result in the justice they desire, it might play a part in a bigger puzzle, or it might be the final piece.

which part of what i've been saying am i pulling the pendulum back so far?

New allegation that he shoved his dick in a girl's face, this time from his college days.

Headhunter wrote:New allegation that he shoved his dick in a girl's face, this time from his college days.

Lol. I see Stormy's attorney is in on another one too.

These tactics never ever backfire on Democrats. Ask Al Franken. Or better yet, ask the entire Democrat Party that thought setting the nuclear option as normal procedure was a good idea.

Let me guess, they are going to investigate every SCOTUS nominee until they win the presidency? Then what?

Foo wrote:Let me guess, they are going to investigate every SCOTUS nominee until they win the presidency? Then what?

Continue investigating. Hopefully. Also republicans can’t really be annoyed by it. There should be a Justice Merrick Garland on the SCOTUS. Stolen seat and dickery under Obama, plus the jammy Gorsuch move has forever ruined any chance of a fair hearing for any SCOTUS nominee as they will all be whack jobs now.

It’s clearly the case that this guy is not a great pick even before all the allegations came out. There’s done dodgy finance takes that are being subsumed by the selacious stuff. They didn’t get their pick and now they are trying to jam him through. Bit nuts.

How the fuck did Stormy's greasy lawyer get involved If you have some evidence just lay it out instead of this slow drip to win the case in the media shit.

Tiggnutz wrote:How the fuck did Stormy's greasy lawyer get involved If you have some evidence just lay it out instead of this slow drip to win the case in the media shit.

He fights injustice everywhere.

Tiggnutz wrote:How the fuck did Stormy's greasy lawyer get involved If you have some evidence just lay it out instead of this slow drip to win the case in the media shit.

Drag a $20 bill through the trailer park and you will catch all sorts of fish.

I like how this story is framed:

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/kavanau ... 54154.html

The media is the enemy of the people.